The COVID pandemic narrative takes another hit
For months, bloggers on the fringe of alternative media have been characterizing COVID-19 and its aftermath as a "plandemic" that had been planned out during two pandemic simulations: SPARS in 2017 and Event 201 in 2019. These conferences were supposedly organized to anticipate the policies and resources that would be needed to fight the next pandemic. Believers in the plandemic scenario discussed parallels between these simulations and today's pandemic that ranged from the concrete to the fanciful, but neither proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that COVID-19 had been planned. Then along came testimony from the chair of M-CAM, an international finance company that keeps track of patent applications.
Patent records accessed by M-CAM show that not once, but twice, U.S. drug companies colluded with government agencies to patent treatments before two disease outbreaks took place. First, between the CDC and Sequoia Pharmaceuticals for treating SARS in 2003. Second, between Moderna and NIAID in November 2019 for treating COVID-19. Martin points out that the holdings of Sequoia were later rolled into Pfizer, Crucell, and Johnson & Johnson. It is no coincidence that two of these three companies (along with Moderna) are now producing vaccines for COVID.
Reiner Fuellmich's interview with Dr. Martin last week is the closest thing to a smoking gun, but Martin's testimony is so dense and prolonged that even the summary provided under the video in the link is hard to process (kudos to the blogger who wrote it). This may be the main reason Martin's shocking revelations are not dominating the alternative media. This interview with Stew Peters is more accessible to dummies like myself.
The collusion between the government and Big Pharma is but a fraction of what remains to be unpacked. Consequently, I will leave it to others to clarify what Dr. Martin means when says there was "no SARS outbreak" or that COVID-19 (which he refers to as SARS-Cov2) is "indistinguishable" from SARS. Sorry to leave you hanging, but I fear not doing justice to what these statements really mean!
SPARS focused on communication strategies to overcome "laypersons dislodging the centrality of the health profession." Event 201 discussed using technology to prioritize "authoritative" messages and suppress "false" messages. Sound familiar?
Peter Daszak infamously stated in 2015:
We need to increase public understanding of the need for medical counter-measures such as a pan-coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media, and the economics will follow the hype.
According to Dr. Martin, the long-term goal of people like Anthony Fauci and Peter Daszak was to get people "addicted" to a pan-coronavirus vaccine.
What does Martin mean by "addiction"? Is it merely an "illusion of demand," or does the toxic spike protein generate a physical need for follow-up injections? If there is a physical component to this addiction, how can such a horrific condition be reversed?
This is an exceptionally serious accusation, but it makes sense in the context of the unprecedented worldwide suppression of early treatments like hydroxychloroquine and the CDC's lack of transparency on vaccine-related deaths.
Hopefully, Dr. Martin will elaborate on the nature of this "vaccine addiction" in the near future because revelations like this merit a larger audience.
Dr. Antonio Chaves teaches biology at a local community college. His interest in economic and social issues stems from his experience teaching environmental science. His older articles with graphs and images are available here.
To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.